An Evaluation of Input Controls for In-Car Interactions

The way drivers operate in-car systems is rapidly changing as traditional physical controls, such as buttons and dials, are being replaced by touchscreens and touch-sensing surfaces. This has the potential to increase driver distraction and error as controls may be harder to find and use. This paper presents an in-car, on the road driving study which examined three key types of input controls to investigate their effects: a physical dial, pressure-based input on a touch surface and touch input on a touchscreen. The physical dial and pressure-based input were also evaluated with and without haptic feedback. The study was conducted with users performing a list-based targeting task using the different controls while driving on public roads. Eye-gaze was recorded to measure distraction from the primary task of driving. The results showed that target accuracy was high across all input methods (greater than 94%). Pressure-based targeting was the slowest while directly tapping on the targets was the faster selection method. Pressure-based input also caused the largest number of glances towards to the touchscreen but the duration of each glance was shorter than directly touching the screen. Our study will enable designers to make more appropriate design choices for future in-car interactions.

[1]  Andreas Butz,et al.  How to make large touch screens usable while driving , 2013, AutomotiveUI.

[2]  Lee Skrypchuk,et al.  Visual-haptic feedback interaction in automotive touchscreens , 2012, Displays.

[3]  Stephen A. Brewster,et al.  Evaluation of Haptic Patterns on a Steering Wheel , 2016, AutomotiveUI.

[4]  Gary Burnett,et al.  Drivers' quality ratings for switches in cars: assessing the role of the vision, hearing and touch senses , 2009, AutomotiveUI.

[5]  David R. Large,et al.  A study of unidirectional swipe gestures on in-vehicle touch screens , 2013, AutomotiveUI.

[6]  Andreas Butz,et al.  Visual cues supporting direct touch gesture interaction with in-vehicle information systems , 2010, AutomotiveUI.

[7]  Jason Lisseman,et al.  Tactile feedback for virtual automotive steering wheel switches , 2015, AutomotiveUI.

[8]  Ravin Balakrishnan,et al.  Pressure widgets , 2004, CHI.

[9]  Tuomo Kujala,et al.  Designing browsing for in-car music player: effects of touch screen scrolling techniques, items per page and screen orientation on driver distraction , 2012, AutomotiveUI.

[10]  Stephen A. Brewster,et al.  Pressure-based text entry for mobile devices , 2009, Mobile HCI.

[11]  Peter Bengtsson,et al.  Driver behaviour during haptic and visual secondary tasks , 2009, AutomotiveUI.

[12]  Emmanuel Pietriga,et al.  Side pressure for bidirectional navigation on small devices , 2013, MobileHCI '13.

[13]  Albrecht Schmidt,et al.  Design space for driver-based automotive user interfaces , 2009, AutomotiveUI.

[14]  J. J. Higgins,et al.  The aligned rank transform for nonparametric factorial analyses using only anova procedures , 2011, CHI.

[15]  Stephen A. Brewster,et al.  Transient and transitional states: pressure as an auxiliary input modality for bimanual interaction , 2014, CHI.

[16]  Janet Wesson,et al.  The impact of an adaptive user interface on reducing driver distraction , 2011, AutomotiveUI.

[17]  Stephen A. Brewster,et al.  Bimanual Input for Tablet Devices with Pressure and Multi-Touch Gestures , 2015, MobileHCI.

[18]  Martin Halvey,et al.  The effects of walking, feedback and control method on pressure-based interaction , 2011, Mobile HCI.

[19]  Stephen A. Brewster,et al.  Investigating Pressure Input and Haptic Feedback for In-Car Touchscreens and Touch Surfaces , 2016, AutomotiveUI.

[20]  Nada Matic,et al.  Towards an Interaction Language for Force-enabled Touchpads in Cars , 2016, AutomotiveUI.

[21]  Mehrdad Hosseini Zadeh,et al.  Effects of varying haptic feedback on driver distraction during vehicular window adjustment , 2010, AutomotiveUI.

[22]  David Crundall,et al.  Some hazards are more attractive than others: drivers of varying experience respond differently to different types of hazard. , 2012, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[23]  Eve E. Hoggan,et al.  An exploration of inadvertent variations in mobile pressure input , 2012, Mobile HCI.

[24]  Albrecht Schmidt,et al.  Making use of drivers' glances onto the screen for explicit gaze-based interaction , 2010, AutomotiveUI.

[25]  John D Lee,et al.  Combining cognitive and visual distraction: less than the sum of its parts. , 2010, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[26]  Andreas Butz,et al.  HapTouch and the 2+1 state model: potentials of haptic feedback on touch based in-vehicle information systems , 2010, AutomotiveUI.

[27]  Tom Wellings,et al.  Assessing subjective response to haptic feedback in automotive touchscreens , 2009, AutomotiveUI.